1 |
Hi Lucas, |
2 |
|
3 |
Lucas Ramage <ramage.lucas94@×××××.com> writes: |
4 |
|
5 |
>>> I've used nfs and sshfs for mounting a remote tree |
6 |
>> I would go this way when in short of storage. |
7 |
> |
8 |
> Are there any performance issues with this approach besides network |
9 |
> speed/bandwidth. |
10 |
> |
11 |
> And let's say I'm not on WiFi. These are mobile devices after all. |
12 |
> |
13 |
> I'm thinking of a proxy server setup that could calculate dependencies |
14 |
> on the fly and only download those specific ebuilds. |
15 |
> |
16 |
> Also, I could see GLEP 9 as being useful for updating over cellular |
17 |
> networks. |
18 |
|
19 |
Go for it. |
20 |
|
21 |
>> Our IRC channel #gentoo-prefix freenode had a lot of discussions on |
22 |
>> relocating Gentoo Prefix. The conclusion is that portage has support |
23 |
>> for it built in, but outdated and need some extra love. |
24 |
> |
25 |
> That would be excellent. Python's virtualenv utility is pretty neat. |
26 |
> It would be awesome if one could install portage inside of virtualenv, |
27 |
> or to be able to `pip install --user portage`. |
28 |
> |
29 |
> Not sure how that would work technically. |
30 |
|
31 |
I don't think venv is the correct way to handle system complexity. And |
32 |
I don't understand what can be achieved by installing portage inside. |
33 |
|
34 |
virtualenv It is a dirtier hack than what we do with Prefix. |
35 |
|
36 |
Benda |